AIM To evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) in early esophageal cancer(EC) performed in a highvolume tertiary cancer center. METHODS A retrospective review of patients undergoing esophagectomy was perfo...AIM To evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) in early esophageal cancer(EC) performed in a highvolume tertiary cancer center. METHODS A retrospective review of patients undergoing esophagectomy was performed and patients with c T1 N0 and c T2 N0 esophageal cancer by EUS were evaluated. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment were reviewed. EUS staging was compared to surgical pathology to determine accuracy of EUS. Descriptive statistics was used to describe the cohort. Student's t test and Fisher's exact test or χ~2 test was used to compare variables. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine if clinical variables such as tumor location and tumor histology were associated with EUS accuracy.RESULTS Between 2000 and 2015, 139 patients with clinical stage Ⅰ or Ⅱ?A esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy were identified. There were 25(18%) female and 114(82%) male patients. The tumor location included the middle third of the esophagus in 11(8%) and lower third and gastroesophageal junction in 128(92%) patients. Ninety-three percent of patients had adenocarcinoma. Preoperative EUS matched the final surgical pathology in 73/139 patients for a concordance rate of 53%. Twenty-nine patients(21%) were under-staged by EUS; of those, 19(14%) had unrecognized nodal disease. Positron emission tomography(PET) was used in addition to EUS for clinical staging in 62/139 patients. Occult nodal disease was only found in 4 of 62 patients(6%) in whom both EUS and PET were negative for nodal involvement. CONCLUSION EUS is less accurate in early EC and endoscopic mucosal resection might be useful in certain settings. The addition of PET to EUS improves staging accuracy.展开更多
文摘AIM To evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) in early esophageal cancer(EC) performed in a highvolume tertiary cancer center. METHODS A retrospective review of patients undergoing esophagectomy was performed and patients with c T1 N0 and c T2 N0 esophageal cancer by EUS were evaluated. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment were reviewed. EUS staging was compared to surgical pathology to determine accuracy of EUS. Descriptive statistics was used to describe the cohort. Student's t test and Fisher's exact test or χ~2 test was used to compare variables. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine if clinical variables such as tumor location and tumor histology were associated with EUS accuracy.RESULTS Between 2000 and 2015, 139 patients with clinical stage Ⅰ or Ⅱ?A esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy were identified. There were 25(18%) female and 114(82%) male patients. The tumor location included the middle third of the esophagus in 11(8%) and lower third and gastroesophageal junction in 128(92%) patients. Ninety-three percent of patients had adenocarcinoma. Preoperative EUS matched the final surgical pathology in 73/139 patients for a concordance rate of 53%. Twenty-nine patients(21%) were under-staged by EUS; of those, 19(14%) had unrecognized nodal disease. Positron emission tomography(PET) was used in addition to EUS for clinical staging in 62/139 patients. Occult nodal disease was only found in 4 of 62 patients(6%) in whom both EUS and PET were negative for nodal involvement. CONCLUSION EUS is less accurate in early EC and endoscopic mucosal resection might be useful in certain settings. The addition of PET to EUS improves staging accuracy.
